Shareholder litigation in mergers and acquisitions

被引:49
作者
Krishnan, C. N. V. [2 ]
Masulis, Ronald W. [3 ]
Thomas, Randall S. [1 ]
Thompson, Robert B. [4 ]
机构
[1] Vanderbilt Univ, Sch Law, Nashville, TN 37240 USA
[2] Case Western Reserve Univ, Weatherhead Sch Management, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[3] Univ New S Wales, Australian Sch Business, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[4] Georgetown Univ, Ctr Law, Washington, DC USA
关键词
M&A offers; Shareholder class action lawsuits; Announcement period return; Deal completion rate; Takeover premium; Price revision; CORPORATE PERFORMANCE; WEALTH; TARGET; GOVERNANCE; TAKEOVERS; GAINS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2012.08.004
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Using hand-collected data, we examine the targeting of shareholder class action lawsuits in merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions, and the associations of these lawsuits with offer completion rates and takeover premia. We find that M&A offers subject to shareholder lawsuits are completed at a significantly lower rate than offers not subject to litigation, after controlling for selection bias, different judicial standards, major offer characteristics. M&A financial and legal advisor reputations as well as industry and year fixed effects. M&A offers subject to shareholder lawsuits have significantly higher takeover premia in completed deals, after controlling for the same factors. Economically, the expected rise in takeover premia more than offsets the fall in the probability of deal completion, resulting in a positive expected gain to target shareholders. However, in general, target stock price reactions to bid announcements do not appear to fully anticipate the positive expected gain from potential litigation. We find that during a merger wave characterized by friendly single-bidder offers, shareholder litigation substitutes for the presence of a rival bidder by policing low-ball bids and forcing offer price improvement by the bidder. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1248 / 1268
页数:21
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]   Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders [J].
Agrawal, A ;
Knoeber, CR .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS, 1996, 31 (03) :377-397
[2]   New evidence and perspectives on mergers [J].
Andrade, G ;
Mitchell, M ;
Stafford, E .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2001, 15 (02) :103-120
[3]  
[Anonymous], M A BREAK FEES US LI
[4]  
Armour J, 2007, GEORGETOWN LAW J, V95, P1727
[5]   Breaking up is hard to do? An analysis of termination fee provisions and merger outcomes [J].
Bates, TW ;
Lemmon, ML .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 2003, 69 (03) :469-504
[6]   The powerful antitakeover force of staggered boards: Theory, evidence, and policy [J].
Bebchuk, LA ;
Coates, JC ;
Subramanian, G .
STANFORD LAW REVIEW, 2002, 54 (05) :887-951
[7]   What Matters in Corporate Governance? [J].
Bebchuk, Lucian ;
Cohen, Alma ;
Ferrell, Allen .
REVIEW OF FINANCIAL STUDIES, 2009, 22 (02) :783-827
[8]  
Betton S., 2008, Markup Pricing Revisited
[9]   Merger negotiations and the toehold puzzle [J].
Betton, Sandra ;
Eckbo, B. Espen ;
Thorburn, Karin S. .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 2009, 91 (02) :158-178
[10]   SYNERGISTIC GAINS FROM CORPORATE ACQUISITIONS AND THEIR DIVISION BETWEEN THE STOCKHOLDERS OF TARGET AND ACQUIRING FIRMS [J].
BRADLEY, M ;
DESAI, A ;
KIM, EH .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 1988, 21 (01) :3-40